Pages

Friday, February 10, 2017

Joshua 5

This chapter had a number of surprises for me. This is the entry to the land, when the manna ceases, where Gilgal, the hillock of foreskins is created. The scene is not like a hospital. There appears to be one Mohel, Joshua. He circumcises the nation, a gloss not used in some translations. As in the case of recent chapters of Jeremiah, there is a very careful statement and restatement of what happened. And here some recurring words in verses 2 to 8 of some interest in defining each of the sections of all the people, those who came out, and those who were born in the wilderness, and where they had been. Could one say that this records the making of the nation? Is nation positive or negative? The KJV had its agenda where גוי is rendered variously as nation, heathen, Gentile, and here people. In the case of people, KJV introduces ambiguity, for it is not העם, the people, but the nation. For heathen and Gentile, they are on more solid ground but using a different nuance for their painting, since there is no other Hebrew stem that they render as heathen or Gentile. Heathen has a different tone, then and now. If God reigns over the nations, this is to include all under one God, but if he reigns over the heathen, does it not exclude? Israel is not Gentile, but it is a nation like all nations. So I use nation when I gloss this word. And though I tell you of my flexible paint brush with some words, there are many glosses which are 'one to one onto' with the Hebrew in the mathematical sense.

And I was further surprised by the section that is very similar to that of Moses in Exodus 3. Similar but different: one sandal rather than sandals, and holy rather than holy ground. Given the emphasis on the land (ערץ), it is curious that the ground (אדם) is mentioned in the scene in Midian and not in the land itself. Perhaps there is a hint of inclusiveness here as elsewhere in TNK, in spite of the great need for a chosen people to form an example of a nation for all nations. The music has some similarity in the two places, but one is approaching the atnah, and the other is in the second half of the verse.

And it happened as all kings of the Amorites that were across the Jordan seaward heard, and all the kings of the Canaanite by the sea, that Yahweh had dried up the waters of the Jordan before the children of Israel until they crossed over,
their heart melted and spirit was not among them any more in the presence of the children of Israel.

For a forty year span the children of Israel meandered in the wilderness, until all the nation was completed, the warriors who came forth from Egypt, who did not hear with the voice of Yahweh,
to whom Yahweh had sworn that he would not show them the land which Yahweh swore to their ancestors to give to us, a land gushing with milk and honey.

And the manna ceased afterwards, when they had eaten from the mature corn of the land, and there was no longer manna for the children of Israel,
and they ate from the income of the land of Canaan in that year.

And it happened when Joshua was in Jericho, and he lifted up his eyes, and he stared, and behold, a man standing before him, and his sword drawn in his hand,.
And Joshua went to him and he said to him, Are you for us and not for our adversaries?

And the chief of the host of Yahweh said to Joshua, Take off your sandal from your foot, for the place that you are standing on, holy it is.
And Joshua did so.

3d

4B

37
8

Also there seems to be a care that circumcision be understood as a once only thing, like Christian baptism. The sign is for ever and unrepeatable. It is also like baptism, clearly a death and a resurrection to life. Note the wording of verse 8. Sure one could come up with a workaround, but why would a translator with an axe to grind do that? There is no need to confuse חיה, life, and שׁלם, wholeness, and רפא, healing. In Colossians, circumcision is used as a type of the death of Jesus (=Joshua). By this act Jesus sanctifies his people, and all who are in this incorporation are 'circumcised' in him, the stripping off of the whole body of flesh.

It is more than curious that the text of Joshua supports my thesis that circumcision is a type of death. (See my novel, Seen from the Street). This figure gives great power to the sign for those who follow it. They may in turn put to death in the Spirit what in them is hurtful to others, and they may expect in faith to be 'restored to life' (a touch of Dickens).